Simulation performance comparison of A*, GLS, RRT and PRM path planning algorithms
Path planning is among the essential qualities of an autonomous robot. The ability to build a collision-free pathway from a pre-defined point to another is known as path planning. There are a variety of approaches offered, all of which vary depending on the search pattern and the map representation...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Conference or Workshop Item |
Published: |
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
2022
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://eprints.um.edu.my/43610/ https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85133428891&doi=10.1109%2fISCAIE54458.2022.9794473&partnerID=40&md5=5be875d27c02498c158a264ff2045611 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
id |
my.um.eprints.43610 |
---|---|
record_format |
eprints |
spelling |
my.um.eprints.436102025-02-18T02:35:30Z http://eprints.um.edu.my/43610/ Simulation performance comparison of A*, GLS, RRT and PRM path planning algorithms Muhammad, Aisha Hasma Abdullah, Nor Rul Ali, Mohammed Abdo Hashem Shanono, Ibrahim Haruna Samad, Rosdiyana TJ Mechanical engineering and machinery Path planning is among the essential qualities of an autonomous robot. The ability to build a collision-free pathway from a pre-defined point to another is known as path planning. There are a variety of approaches offered, all of which vary depending on the search pattern and the map representation method. In this study, four robust path planning algorithms, namely: Probabilistic Roadmaps (PRMs), A-star, the Rapidly Exploring Random Trees (RRTs), and Generalized Laser Simulator (GLS), were simulated and their performance was measured and compared according to the total path distance covered, search time and path smoothness. The result obtained reveals that all the four algorithms could navigate and generate a feasible through the 2D map successfully. The GLS algorithm performs better in all the measured parameters followed by the PRM, RRT, and then the A∗ algorithm. © 2022 IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. 2022 Conference or Workshop Item PeerReviewed Muhammad, Aisha and Hasma Abdullah, Nor Rul and Ali, Mohammed Abdo Hashem and Shanono, Ibrahim Haruna and Samad, Rosdiyana (2022) Simulation performance comparison of A*, GLS, RRT and PRM path planning algorithms. In: 12th IEEE Symposium on Computer Applications and Industrial Electronics, ISCAIE 2022, 21-22 May 2022, Virtual, Online. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85133428891&doi=10.1109%2fISCAIE54458.2022.9794473&partnerID=40&md5=5be875d27c02498c158a264ff2045611 |
institution |
Universiti Malaya |
building |
UM Library |
collection |
Institutional Repository |
continent |
Asia |
country |
Malaysia |
content_provider |
Universiti Malaya |
content_source |
UM Research Repository |
url_provider |
http://eprints.um.edu.my/ |
topic |
TJ Mechanical engineering and machinery |
spellingShingle |
TJ Mechanical engineering and machinery Muhammad, Aisha Hasma Abdullah, Nor Rul Ali, Mohammed Abdo Hashem Shanono, Ibrahim Haruna Samad, Rosdiyana Simulation performance comparison of A*, GLS, RRT and PRM path planning algorithms |
description |
Path planning is among the essential qualities of an autonomous robot. The ability to build a collision-free pathway from a pre-defined point to another is known as path planning. There are a variety of approaches offered, all of which vary depending on the search pattern and the map representation method. In this study, four robust path planning algorithms, namely: Probabilistic Roadmaps (PRMs), A-star, the Rapidly Exploring Random Trees (RRTs), and Generalized Laser Simulator (GLS), were simulated and their performance was measured and compared according to the total path distance covered, search time and path smoothness. The result obtained reveals that all the four algorithms could navigate and generate a feasible through the 2D map successfully. The GLS algorithm performs better in all the measured parameters followed by the PRM, RRT, and then the A∗ algorithm. © 2022 IEEE. |
format |
Conference or Workshop Item |
author |
Muhammad, Aisha Hasma Abdullah, Nor Rul Ali, Mohammed Abdo Hashem Shanono, Ibrahim Haruna Samad, Rosdiyana |
author_facet |
Muhammad, Aisha Hasma Abdullah, Nor Rul Ali, Mohammed Abdo Hashem Shanono, Ibrahim Haruna Samad, Rosdiyana |
author_sort |
Muhammad, Aisha |
title |
Simulation performance comparison of A*, GLS, RRT and PRM path planning algorithms |
title_short |
Simulation performance comparison of A*, GLS, RRT and PRM path planning algorithms |
title_full |
Simulation performance comparison of A*, GLS, RRT and PRM path planning algorithms |
title_fullStr |
Simulation performance comparison of A*, GLS, RRT and PRM path planning algorithms |
title_full_unstemmed |
Simulation performance comparison of A*, GLS, RRT and PRM path planning algorithms |
title_sort |
simulation performance comparison of a*, gls, rrt and prm path planning algorithms |
publisher |
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. |
publishDate |
2022 |
url |
http://eprints.um.edu.my/43610/ https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85133428891&doi=10.1109%2fISCAIE54458.2022.9794473&partnerID=40&md5=5be875d27c02498c158a264ff2045611 |
_version_ |
1825160597136736256 |
score |
13.244413 |